Last time I rode the White Rim (Moab area) in a day, it was over 12 hours. My wife and I do these rides together...we never push the pace. Just want to see if we can do it! It is usually just the two of us...we can't find anybody our age who will ride with us!

Our favorite big trail rides near our house are in the 40 to 50 mile range at over 12000 feet. These take up to 7 hours for us. If you wipe out that far out in the backcountry and get hurt it would not be pretty!

The athletic ability of these guys who race this terrain is inspiring!

I have been wanting to ride Tahoe. We hiked Donner a bit on our way back from the Gorge a couple weeks ago. One of our retirement goals (in a couple years) is to tour the country and ride as many trails as we can.

My brother raced in a 100 mile mountain bike race that Armstrong won a couple years back. Armstrong got a flat tire several miles from the finish line and rode in on the rim to shatter the course record.

He is a remarkable athlete regardless of these accusations.

The anti-doping people maintain that without drugs he would not be such a remarkable athlete. Futhermore, it seems that they have so much evidence against his claims that he can't defend them. Hincapie was his domestique through all his triumphs and fed him performance enhancers. He is also the most well liked and respected men in cycling. He and others with serious credentials basically copped a deal where they got off with a 6 month suspension from the pro scene to testify to the truth which was fully biased against Lance. The tests are not only more effective today, Armstrong's accusers also claim he received blood transfusions. In my mind that means that before his tests the Spanish doctors might have taken the tainted blood out and replaced it with clean. No one questions that his "cancer" was cured with drugs. Why do they have such a hard time excepting that his serious medical treatment stopped at some point and his miraculous recover was totally drug free?

Read the following sentiment in the Washington Post and couldn't agree any further. Namely, Armstrong is the most tested athlete in history, and every single test over the span of about 10 years (the years in question) came back negative. The US anti-doping agency ("USADA") determines that it will ignore the tests and give greater credence to testimonial witnesses (the people who get on the stand). Therefore, with witnesses like George Hincapie in hand, the private powers that be declare Armstrong is not the winner of seven consecutive Tour de France wins -despite not having authority over the Tour nor any authority over international drug issues in sports.

Let's turn it around, suggests the author. Had the USADA prosecuted with a failed drug test in hand, would the USADA been convinced of Armstrong's innocence regardless of the number of witnesses who might say that Lance didn't do it?

Either believe the tests or don't mandate their use. The USADA and the international authorities, by that measure, are terribly wrong to try to have it both ways.

To believe the nonsense about never failing a drugs test shows a lack of knowledge of the pro. cycling world. As has frequently been pointed out, only an idiot fails a cycling drug test.

If you want to know what really goes on in pro. cycling, especially with regard to Armstrong, I suggest checking the CLINIC section of the CYCLING NEWS.COM forum where all the latest on drugging 'rings' and methods is discussed. Anybody blinded by Armstrong fanboyism, or just plain naivety, would soon have their blinkers removed.

Very briefly, U.S.A.D.A has sworn testimony proof and details of a cover up to Armstrongs systematic doping. He and others of his camp were charged by them to face arbitration.

He first tried to block such through the courts, (case thrown out by judge Sparks), then backed out of arbitration at the eleventh hour. By doing so (and being stripped of his wins) and throwing in the towel, he allegedly hopes to prevent the evidence of his complicity in doping being made public. Hopefully, it just won't work because two of the other four accused have still (so far) opted for arbitration. One way or another, the cover ups WILL be exposed to the public.

I don't often agree with Sailing Joe, but in this instance he is not so blind as some might think!

It is clear that in laying its charges USADA (UNITED STATES anti doping agency ... for Matys sake!) has hard evidence of a multi layered cover up of E.P.O. dosing and blood transfusions, which has been a norm in pro cycling for many years.

Furthermore, this evidence would seem to implicate senior officials of the U.C.I. (Union Cyclists International.) Armstrong allegedly DID borderline fail two tests, one of which was said to be consistent with the use of E.P.O. and that they were allegedly disregarded.

Travis (USADA) has clearly stated that all evidence WILL be released in due course (arbitration with two others still pending) regardless of legal threats of being sued by Armstrongs legal representatives should USADA attempt to place any of the evidence in the public domain!

Pro cycling has been a dirty sport for far too long, and many deaths (Too much E.P.O use makes blood like treacle, and users had to be woken every night to do exercises to prevent dying of heart failure) have resulted, some later in life from illnesses connected with their habits.

We have a right to expect that youngsters trying to enter the pro cycling world in future should be able to compete drug free, on an even playing field, without having to endager their health.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou cannot attach files in this forumYou cannot download files in this forum